Got a tip for us?
Let us know
Become a MacRumors Supporter for $50/year with no ads, ability to filter front page stories, and private forums.
Photo of the day - September 2009
- Thread starter Olifant
- Start date
- Sort by reaction score
- Status
N80/85/1.8+Ilford Delta 400.
This one with the mom and kids has a nice, grainy b/w film look - there's just something about b/w film, where even highlights can be a bit blown, yet it only adds to the image. The only thing that surprises me about it (with the Delta 400) is that it's a very fine grained film normally, but it looked more like HP5+ with the Tri-x styled grain. Interesting. Did you push process it?
This shot looks more like digital converted to b/w. Is it still the Delta 400? Totally different grain/noise/edges look than the other one. I do like the shot, nice and tight, but don't like the tonal and textural character of the image as much as the mom and kids. Somewhat grim to be seeing a young lady dragging so far down on that butt, though... but it's a compelling image in black and white.
First to turn - big leaf maple
Grabbed the D50 for a short walk on my place today, peering up into the woods near the creek. The big-leaf maples always define the end of summer first around here.
Model: D50
ISO: 200
Exposure: 1/80 sec
Aperture: 4.0
Focal Length: 24mm
Grabbed the D50 for a short walk on my place today, peering up into the woods near the creek. The big-leaf maples always define the end of summer first around here.
Model: D50
ISO: 200
Exposure: 1/80 sec
Aperture: 4.0
Focal Length: 24mm
Sure do appreciate the comments, pdx 
. I need to return the favor soon.
It's interesting that you mention Delta 400 as a fine grain film, because I find it to be relatively grainy next to Kodak 400 B&W Pro, which is super fine grain.
That's Kodak B&W 400.
I had to look at the negatives just now to check that the image of the kids was in fact the Delta, because I use HP5 as well. No push processing, just a straight up 400-level processing.
You were right on target with both shots, of course. The second image was taken with my D700+85/1.8 and converted in NX2 to B&W. Just a straight conversion, nothing extra added. I don't know how to do that sort of thing yet. I'd like to learn in time.
On the compositional side, I find that I'm developing a style of some kind, and it's mainly centered around street portraits, particularly close ups. You could say I've taken the maxim to "fill the frame" to its furthest reaches.
Edit: Very nice photo, pdx. More than a bit dreamy, I'd say. Remarkable how well the older DSLRs perform when handled well.
. I need to return the favor soon.It's interesting that you mention Delta 400 as a fine grain film, because I find it to be relatively grainy next to Kodak 400 B&W Pro, which is super fine grain.
That's Kodak B&W 400.
I had to look at the negatives just now to check that the image of the kids was in fact the Delta, because I use HP5 as well. No push processing, just a straight up 400-level processing.
You were right on target with both shots, of course. The second image was taken with my D700+85/1.8 and converted in NX2 to B&W. Just a straight conversion, nothing extra added. I don't know how to do that sort of thing yet. I'd like to learn in time.
On the compositional side, I find that I'm developing a style of some kind, and it's mainly centered around street portraits, particularly close ups. You could say I've taken the maxim to "fill the frame" to its furthest reaches.
Edit: Very nice photo, pdx
. More than a bit dreamy, I'd say. Remarkable how well the older DSLRs perform when handled well.
Sure do appreciate the comments, pdx
It's interesting that you mention Delta 400 as a fine grain film, because I find it to be relatively grainy next to Kodak 400 B&W Pro, which is super fine grain.
That's Kodak B&W 400.
I had to look at the negatives just now to check that the image of the kids was in fact the Delta, because I use HP5 as well. No push processing, just a straight up 400-level processing.
You were right on target with both shots, of course. The second image was taken with my D700+85/1.8 and converted in NX2 to B&W. Just a straight conversion, nothing extra added. I don't know how to do that sort of thing yet. I'd like to learn in time.
On the compositional side, I find that I'm developing a style of some kind, and it's mainly centered around street portraits, particularly close ups. You could say I've taken the maxim to "fill the frame" to its furthest reaches.
Edit: Looks like your photo link has an error in it somewhere.
Thanks - changed the link to 800px size. Somehow, picasaweb.com doesn't like me linking to the 'full screen' size, which would be 1024px wide... oh well.
I've shot a lot of HP5 400 in the past, and some Delta 400, but not nearly as much. It's definitely grainier than something like Kodak T-Max (do they still make that?) but it was supposed to be a "newer generation," aligned grain type of film when it came out, supposedly to give a much smoother appearance than the Tri-x or HP5 cluster type grain. Of course, how the film is processed, and which developer is used can certainly affect the graininess. And, if it's scanned from a print, or from a scanned negative, it can look very different (based on my own experiments.) But regardless of all that, I do like the look of it in your photograph. I've never minded grain in black and white film - it has a certain quality, unlike digital noise, that is hard to replicate in a digitally generated image, although I guess some of the newer software out there is intended to do just that... I just don't know how well it works... cheers -phil
Downtown Raleigh
Taken back in 2007 but recently rediscovered as I slowly clean up my photo library. If you're familiar with the Raleigh skyline you'll notice that the RBC center is missing.
This was a part of a series of images that was shot for this project: accipitergallery.com/slice/ although that particular image wasn't used. Give it time to load and start clicking. Try the image on the second row, 6th column.
Taken back in 2007 but recently rediscovered as I slowly clean up my photo library. If you're familiar with the Raleigh skyline you'll notice that the RBC center is missing.
This was a part of a series of images that was shot for this project: accipitergallery.com/slice/ although that particular image wasn't used. Give it time to load and start clicking. Try the image on the second row, 6th column.
Oh yes, most certainly. This was taken at a photography day at a cat survival trust sanctuary. We were able to get behind the first fence and get very close to the animals. The leopards were on the whole fairly passive (being bred in captivity)
This Eurasion Lynx, however, is extremely bad tempered.
They have a way of looking at you with unbridled malice.
Oh yes, most certainly. This was taken at a photography day at a cat survival trust sanctuary. We were able to get behind the first fence and get very close to the animals. The leopards were on the whole fairly passive (being bred in captivity)
This Eurasion Lynx, however, is extremely bad tempered.
They have a way of looking at you with unbridled malice.
Wow, too cool. *seething with jealousy*
Both of those shots are awesome. I only asked with the leopard because his eyes seem unfocused, like a stuffed one's would. The lynx is very obviously alive, his eyes really show it. Great shots, thanks for sharing.
Yeah, I see what you're saying now. And in the original shot, the eyes are out of focus. This unforgivable lack of control on my part is due to the fact that the my lens was less than an inch away from the bars at the time.
I like the way the branch and leaves are backlit...
Stoodley Pike...
I really like looking at the lower half of this shot... great tones and it makes me want to wander out into that scene. Only criticism is the horizon is too centered vertically, and halfway up the sky there's not much of interest. The same scene on a more typical Doylem cloudy day with sun breaking through would be fine, but on this day I'd probably just include more foreground, less sky, or... (dare I say it...?
) crop it a bit.. Anyway, that was a long-winded way of saying I love this shot... but it ain't perfect. This Eurasion Lynx, however, is extremely bad tempered.
They have a way of looking at you with unbridled malice.
This is an incredible shot. Even more with the b/w treatment.
I like the way the branch and leaves are backlit...
Stoodley Pike...
Very nice. I drove past here a few weeks ago on the way home from holiday.
I notice that it was taken at f/9. I like the way that you have the rocks in the foreground in focus, but the monument is slightly soft. Would a tighter aperture have made this work slightly better?
Eh, it's an animal. Not like you can go, "Ok, kitty, look over here!" Still great shots regardless.
The problem with film grain in B&W film is that its appearance is due to more factors than just the native size of the grains- developer, development time and exposure all interrelate- so you can't really get the "best" out of a film in terms of grain without a lot of time and effort... Moreover, if you use a staining developer then the grain is even less of an issue.
Kodak re-formulated TMY recently (late 2007 I think) to get finer grain and a tonal curve that's much closer to Tri-X. If I still shot 4x5, I'd want to try a box or two- but I'd also want to go to Pyrocat HD since the toxicity issues with my favorite developer (Hutchings' PMK) aren't something I'd want to deal with again.
With PMK, I actually found that grain didn't show up much, no matter if I were shooting Delta 100, 400, "3200," FP4, or HP5+ at 120 or 4x5- I'm sure it'd be more of an issue in 35mm. Kodak films tended to stain worse overall than Ilford films in rotary processors though.
Paul
- Status